Norton Rose and Deacons set for separate profit centres
Norton Rose and Australian firm Deacons will operate two separate profit centres when the pair merge in January next year. The firms will integrate practice lines and systems including IT, finance and HR; however, partner remuneration will remain independent.
June 25, 2009 at 04:28 AM
5 minute read
Integration plans to see practices aligned and shared bonus pool
Norton Rose and Australian firm Deacons will operate two separate profit centres when the pair merge in January next year.
The firms will integrate practice lines and systems including IT, finance and HR, however, partner remuneration will remain independent.
Instead, each firm will contribute profits from their respective pools into a shared account to be used for expenses and bonuses, with partners set to receive an annual bonus intended to encourage and reward integration.
The amount to be paid into the bonus pool is still under discussion, as the first payment is not expected until April 2010.
Norton Rose, which operates a lockstep model, reported a 17% drop in average profits per equity partner to £517,000 for 2008-09. In contrast, Deacons remunerates partners based on merit and saw average profits of around £450,000 last year.
Partners at Norton Rose and Deacons voted in favour of the first major merger between an UK and Australian firm earlier this week (22 June).
The agreement will see Deacons rebrand as part of the Norton Rose Group from 1 January, with the firms working in the meantime to align Deacons' practices around Norton Rose's main lines of business including energy, banking and financial institutions.
As part of the integration, Norton Rose is planning to overhaul its constitution to incorporate Deacons chief executive Don Boyd, who will take on the role of deputy chief executive once the merger goes live. It will also open seats on its board to various members of Deacons' partnership.
Norton Rose chief executive Peter Martyr, who will lead the merged firm, said: "Unifying the business is clearly the most important first step, at numerous levels such as strategy, clients, people, systems and constitution. We have identified numerous client opportunities and are satisfied that we share a similar culture."
The merger adds 146 partners from Deacons' offices in Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne, Canberra and Perth, taking Norton Rose's presence in the Asia-Pacific region to 700 fee earners. It ends Deacons' relationship with its Asian network of offices, though teams of lawyers from Singapore and Jakarta are expected to join Norton Rose.
Though UK and Australian firms have discussed similar moves in the past, there has never been a deal of this scale before. Most recently, talks between Clifford Chance and Mallesons Stephen Jaques ended at the close of last year.
Norton Rose's news has received a mixed reaction from the market. One former Norton Rose partner said: "It is an interesting move. They have been looking for an Australian hook-up for some time. The Australian market has been affected by the recession as has the rest of the world. Maybe this is an opportunity to expand in a counter-cyclical way."
However the senior partner of a rival top 10 City firm countered: "I thought that most firms had thought Australia to be a saturated market. It is a slightly mystifying move considering they are not taking the Asian offices as well."
Market reaction
Senior partner, City firm: "If it hands Norton Rose strength in Asia, then clearly then it could be important. As for the timing of a merger, I would never encourage a merger based on weakness in the current time. If it is a merger based on strength, then it could well be good timing. It really depends if they have time to set aside for the management capital needed to make it work."
Consultant: "An interesting move. Making an Asian strategy work from Australia isn't easy, as many have found out, but that shouldn't stop someone trying."
Managing partner, Australian firm: "Deacons is a mid-tier Australian firm. I think in some respects it fits Norton Rose's profile as it focuses on corporate and projects. What I don't see is a synergy of clients, as Deacons doesn't have large cross-border clients. I can see how from Deacon's point of view they would gain exposure to a greater global network, but I am struggling to see what it will give Norton Rose."
Asian head, magic circle firm: "I don't know how large Norton Rose's current Asia practice is, but it will definitely add something on the Australian end. There is a lot of Australasian legal work at the moment, but it is pretty well-served by the Australian firms."
China head, City firm: "My off-the-cuff reaction is that this is irrelevant. I don't see the synergies for a firm like Norton Rose to merge with a mid-tier Australian firm. I don't see what that really creates. Deacons doesn't have a large Asia practice so I don't really see the synergies there. To have Australian coverage you need Sydney and Melbourne, anything on top of that is questionable. Whether the other offices will be an economic strain on Norton Rose depends on Deacons' market position in Australia and the financial arrangements of the merger. They must have addressed the disparity in profitability somehow."
For more on Norton Rose's merger visit Editor's comment: Kangaroo court.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCan Law Firms Avoid Landing on the 'Enemy' List During the Trump Administration?
5 minute readLetter From Asia: Will Big Law Ever Bother to Understand Asia Again?
Simpson Thacher, Nishimura, Mori Hamada Assist on KKR's $4B Winning Bid in Japan
Trending Stories
- 1Insurer Not Required to Cover $29M Wrongful Death Judgment, Appeals Court Rules
- 2Slideshow: Jewish Bar Association of Georgia Marks 1st Year With Hanukkah Party
- 3Holland & Knight Launches Export Control Disputes and Advocacy Team
- 4Blake Lively's claims that movie co-star launched smear campaign gets support in publicist's suit
- 5Middle District of Pennsylvania's U.S. Attorney Announces Resignation
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250